Last week we took a look at the low-budget slasher Criminally Insane, a movie with a good core concept but hamstrung by all sorts of issues – bad acting, terrible editing, awful and unrealistic effects and a horribly rushed finale. But wait, there's more, because for some reason – and a mere twelve years later – the sequel to the 1975 original arrived. Why on earth it took so long to put together is beyond me, as honestly is why anyone even bothered to put it together.

Now the first one was bad, don't get me wrong, but it had the odd moment and, as I said, with a higher budget and some different actors, there was something that could have worked. Criminally Insane 2 – and there's no easy way to say this – feels like one the absolute laziest, most half-arsed sequels I've ever seen. It's fair to say that sequels are practically renowned for not living up to the original, but this one didn't have a high bar set for it. Anyway, let's explore further...

Criminally Insane 2 sees Ethel Janowksi, our lead from the first movie, in an asylum which is suffering with horrible budget cuts. As such, the head of the establishment decides that all inmates with no trouble on their records for the last five years will be released into half-way houses – which takes in Ethel, of course. Forget the fact that she killed six people twelve years before, why not just let her out and free? So Ethel finds herself at Bartholomew House, run by Hope Bartholomew, which she shares with a couple of other similar recently released patients – including a man who openly admits killing at least three of his wives. Of course it's not long before some of the visitors and residents start to agitate Ethel, and the killing begins once again.

The most criminal (if you'll excuse the pun) thing this movie does is the overuse of footage from the previous movie – in fact I would estimate at least 25 minutes of the 61 here are made up of clips from the first film, which leaves remarkably little new material here. If you've seen the first – which of course I have, and expect many viewers of this one will as well – then practically half of the runtime is absolutely irrelevant to you. This comes in dream sequences and flashbacks for the most part, with long scenes of Ethel sleeping and having nightmares about her past crimes. Not only that, there are scenes in here that actively feel like they are killing time – there are long scenes of eating and food preparation throughout. Maybe the director is trying to say something there, but two minutes of a man serving the residents of Bartholomew House dog food is utterly unnecessary. In all these cases you could have cut down by half or more, but then this one would have likely been 40 minutes or something like.

On top of that, it inherits all the same problems as the original – horrendous acting, hokey effects and unrealistic-looking blood, choppy and baffling cuts from one scene to the next, and another bizarre attempted twist in the last ten seconds of the film that just doesn't seem to click with anything else. 

I can't imagine this was a sequel that anyone was crying out for, and it pads its length in all sorts of ways to hit that classic follow-up issue – namely, it's not as good as the original, and the original wasn't really up to much in the first place...

RATING: 0.5/10. One of the oddest sequels I've ever seen, in that it borrows so heavily from the first despite barely reaching what you could call full film-length. If you've seen part one you could skip over practically half of this and miss nothing. This one doesn't have as good a concept, and the troubles of the original feel exacerbated – in fact I'm only giving it  a half-point for a single scene that really made me laugh out loud. If it only avoids nil points for an unintentional splash of humour then that likely tells you all you need to know – it's a bottom of the barrel scraping 0.5/10 from me.

There are a lot of films on the 'I want to watch that at some point' list, and among them is Criminally Insane. You can thank the comedy stylings of one of my favourite YouTube channels, The Cinema Snob, for that, in highlighting this notorious mid-70s slasher. I say notorious – no doubt there are many movies out there that are better known, but in cult circles this is a movie that comes with a certain reputation. Director Nick Philips was prolific from the late 60s to the late 80s, and was still helming films into the 2000s, including a 2003 version of Henry James' Turn of the Screw.

Criminally Insane is also sometimes known as Crazy Fat Ethel, which probably better bottles in a few words what this one is all about. We begin with Ethel Janowski in a mental hospital, before she's released into the custody of her grandmother. However, on doctor's advice, Ethel's grandma tries to make her grandaughter eat less – not something that Ethel welcomes at all, to the point of stabbing her grandmother when she tries to lock the fridge. Things devolve pretty quickly from there, as Ethel continues to binge before the arrival of Rosalie, who had been staying with Ethel's grandma. Unfortunately Ethel simply leaves her grandmother's corpse to rot, which soon enough arouses the suspicion of Rosalie and scumbag boyfriend John ('I'll tell you why I hit you... sometimes you girls need a beating, you all do' is a typically lovely line of sample dialogue from him). Add into that the fact that Ethel has been skipping out on her continuing electroshock therapy (??) and it's not long until the pressure of life back in society is getting too much, leading to a shocking conclusion...

That story probably doesn't sound too bad, and the irony is that this could have been a really good movie in different hands, or even with a bigger budget. This was made for $30,000 – not a lot of money even back in 1975 – and the lack of every cent really shows here. The movie is shot on video, which cuts and stutters throughout, and the whole feel of the movie is incredibly choppy. The editing cuts remarkably quickly, sometimes confusingly, and the effects look absolutely atrocious – the blood doesn't look or behave anything like blood, and ultimately I suspect we're actually watching red paint for the most part. The acting for the most part is pretty ropey, especially from many of the side characters, and there are so many parts of the story that just don't hold any logic. How on earth Ethel's murderous rampage isn't discovered much earlier is beyond me given how badly she hides those crimes. Basically every character other than Ethel winds up dead at the end of the tale, not that you'd really miss any of them – most are either barely in it or fundamentally unlikeable. And the ending itself is so rushed you could literally blink and miss it – and given the whole thing scarcely runs 60 minutes there's no real reason to rush it.

This is such a strange offering it almost needs to be seen to be believed – in its own way it's a compelling way to spend an hour of your life. It's not good – in fact it misses the mark horribly in every regard – but like Black Devil Doll or The Room before it, there's a grim fascination in just how poor this one us. But while those almost go full circle to 'so bad it's good' territory, this one is unfortunately fairly tedious and lacks the oddball charm of those particular movies. In a way I am glad I've finally seen it, because it lives up to everything I had heard about it and more.

RATING: 2/10. Criminally Insane does practically everything really poorly, but I have to give it something for what was – or at least could have been – an interesting plot and for at least holding a few comedy moments, be they intentional or otherwise. Maybe the whole thing was shot deliberately to be this awful with a view to being a future cult classic, but I don't think it's even achieved that goal if that ever existed. All in all it's a criminally bad 2/10.

Over the years, we've watched a lot of films whose titles have really summed up exactly what they are about. Look at a movie like Slaughtered Vomit Dolls or Vase De Noces (AKA The Pig F***Ing Movie) and it's basically crystal clear exactly what you're about to get into. And so it was that I stumbled upon this South Korean short film, and with a title like Necrophilia I thought it wouldn't take a huge amount of imagination to figure out what this one would be about.  And it's not a topic we've ever really ducked, or shied away from – there have been a few nauseating experiences in the field (IE Aftermath), but I've never let that put me off before...

However, one slightly baffling quarter of an hour later, I was rather forced to eat my words on this one. Because Necrophilia isn't really about any physical relations with the dead at all – more a sort of morbid romantic connection, as well as an obsession with sex as a kind of 'little death', presumably riffing off the French name for the orgasm. Was it interesting? Yes, without a doubt. Am I 100% clear on what I just watched? No, not in the slightest. But then again that's not always a bad thing, with the chance to pull at and further puzzle over a film sometimes being a benefit – in fact the work of Phil Stevens (Flowers, Lung II) has always left me with this similar kind of sense. And while Necrophilia might not quite have that edge of quality, it's a worthy effort in its own right.

The story follows I-Jin, who is a young journalist writing a report on the 'orange people' (yes, that reference is lost on me too) and is under pressure to meet her deadline. She spends a lot of time with her best friend, who seems to be pretty open in her discussion about sex and death. The rest of the story – honestly, I'm not totally sure. There's some link to the murder of a man she may or may not know, and some distinctly strange and trippy dream sequences, often featuring her best friend in violent and/or sexual scenes. The real-life elements rather slip into the background compared to these moments, leaving the movie feeling interestingly multifaceted without making it immediately possible to latch onto. My guess is that this one would likely reward repeat viewing in order to further pull at its complexities.

The film itself is really beautifully shot, and while some of the effects can look a little cheap – and the sense of 80s-ness is bottled in an awful opening credits sequence – there's plenty of scenes here that look great. The lead performances capture the kind of ethereality required by this kind of story, and the closing scene goes some way towards explaining what's really going on here. One of the reasons I downgraded this one slightly is that this is one of the few scenes that felt a bit clumsy, and I feel like there could well have been a better way to close this one out there somewhere..

But overall this one left a definite impression on me, and as a short film provides a fascinating insight into a small part of a whole that feels tantalisingly close, almost close enough to grasp, without quite being able to reach. The old saying goes 'leave them wanting more', and Necrophilia certainly fits that particular motto. I'd have loved to have seen this as a feature, but with nearly 40 years passed from its release I expect that particular ship has very much sailed...

RATING: 8.5/10. The latest in what feels like a slew of very good short films, Necrophilia is a piece of art that is likely to leave you equal parts confused and curious. Bound to reward further study, this little-known short feature from an era when splatter and gore were extremely prevalent in the region eschews that side of things for a dark tale with a striking visual aesthetic and some equally grabbing ideas and concepts. I'd argue that this one was well worth fifteen minutes of any horror fan's time, with a very creditable 8.5/10.

What is it about one word titles that are so hard to resist? In fact a search around IMDB to add all the details of this film reveals there have been a whole slew of movies called Brutal, and Taskashi Hirose’s offering – a recent release from the good folk at Unearthed Films – undoubtedly lives up to its billing. Then again, anyone who’s a regular purveyor of Japanese horror cinema will know there’s little shyness about laying on the gore and violence thick, so in that regard Brutal is following on in a fine tradition. The fact it has found a home with Unearthed, one of the most unflinching movie labels out there, should also tell its own story.

Brutal is a relatively short movie – not long over an hour total – that follows two serial killers, simply addressed here as Man and Woman. We begin with a first ‘chapter’, our male lead killing off two women that he has trapped in his house, one with a particular rough beating, asking them if they can 'understand him'. The second woman dies in an even more unpleasant fashion than the first, culminating in an opening that is grim, grimy and hard not to wince at least a little when watching.

Our second ‘chapter’ shows our female killer with a sort of montage, almost a ‘best of' her kills, before she meets a man in a bar and decides to take him home. There’s a strangely beautiful and hypnotic scene in the middle here as the two of them talk in the car while the scenery shoots by – it’s really gorgeous and honestly feels as though it belongs to another film entirely, although you could argue it’s a sort of breather from the brutality that is tactically offered up by the director. When the two get home, we find out her male companion knows what she has been doing, and sets about to kill her himself as a sort of retribution or revenge for all the male lives she has taken. He meets an equally nasty end after a tough-looking fight scene between the two, again a very effective and crunching confrontation.

I don’t want to spoil the end of this one, so I won’t except to say that the meeting of these two opposite yet eerily similar forces is inevitable, and the climax if anything is even more brutal than what has gone before. However there was something about the ultimate message here I didn’t like, and that made me feel distinctly uneasy as a viewer, so I’m going to downgrade it somewhat for that – again, I can’t say too much more without giving it all away. You’ll just have to watch it for yourself and see what you make of it, and I expect it to be the source of plenty of debate going forward.

Brutal feels like a really promising concept, and it looks great both in its depiction of absolute horror and nihilism as well as one abstractly beautiful scene in the middle. The lead performances are effective, and the more unpleasant scenes look uncomfortably realistic. There’s a splash of inspiration from the likes of Ichi The Killer and American Guinea Pig: Bloodshock here without a doubt, but it doesn’t quite deliver the brilliant finale of those two pieces. If you’re a fan of Asian extreme then you should check this one out – I don’t think it’s a leader in the field, but putting my own discomforts about the ending aside there’s plenty to like here for fans of hardcore serial killer movies.

RATING: 6.5/10. A hard one to rate, as I did enjoy it for the most part and really respect what the actors and director achieved with this one. It looks great whether it’s in violent, chaotic mode or in calming, dreamy mode, and the breaking down into chapters feels like a clever device and a nice way to build to a finale. However it’s a denouement that to me, personally, really missed the mark. Some people might love this ending, but it simply wasn’t for me, so what could easily have been a 9 or maybe even more slips down to a 6.5/10 all told. 

A new year is upon us, and of course that brings new and exciting possibilities and the prospect of intriguing new developments for Film Gutter. What cinematic madness lies ahead for this year? Will there be another film to absolutely break me before the closing credits? Yes, the excitement is boundless as 2019 begins...
 
...with a rape revenge movie. Yes, new possibilities indeed.
 
I've written a little about this subject before, but it's very hard to do something different and exciting in this subgenre. There have been a handful – movies like Julia, Landmine Goes Click or American Mary leap to mind – but the name of the milieu gives away the plot right away. You know that someone is going to get raped in the first part of the movie, and then they are going to get their revenge. The mould hasn't changed a great deal since I Spit On Your Grave, and nor can it really, since the description applied to it is so limiting.

Which brings us to Even Lambs Have Teeth, a 2015 offering from Terry Miles that follows friends Katie and Sloane about to go off and work at an eco-farm near their uncle while one of their mums (honestly didn't catch which one it was) goes off to Cuba. A slightly random opening, but of course it isn't long before the girls decide not to wait around for the bus to the farm, instead taking a lift from two handsome strangers. Then they find themselves drugged and waking up in the middle of the forest in a shipping container. From there a host of men from around the local area come to visit and abuse our lead characters over an unspecified amount of time (which I think amounts to a few days).

This leads me to one of the main problems about the movie, in that things do feel a bit too vague to really connect home. Something like I Spit On Your Grave made an emotional connection by showing in quite shocking detail the attack on our lead, and when she inflicted the equally brutal revenge there was a kind of catharsis there – it offered a certain degree of satisfaction to see. There are plenty of hints and intimations of what happens to our lead characters here, but nothing much is ever shown in any detail, so you do feel slightly cut adrift. Strangely the same goes for the revenge, which again on numerous occasions hints at real brutality but somehow seems to duck short of the issue. If this was a deliberate decision it doesn't feel like one that helps, although of course it may have been cuts or restrictions of some variety there too.

I always try and take into account I'm not a big fan of these kind of films when reviewing, and barring the above issue there's not really a massive amount wrong with this one. The performances from our two main actresses are solid, and fit the story well, and I was pretty partial to the soundtrack that ran throughout the movie. Unfortunately the male characters in the film feel seriously underdeveloped – some of them I couldn't even remember when the girls mete out their vengeance – which again gives the film a somehow unsatisfying resolution, and the tendency to go for a few too many cute one-liners also feels a little excessive. Maybe it's in some parts an attempt to satirise some of the other examples of the field, but it doesn't really hit home.

RATING: 5.5/10. Even Lambs Have Teeth is a decent rape revenge movie that is likely to hit the mark well enough for fans of the subgenre, but for me it all just feels a bit too comfortable and familiar to be deeply memorable. It's not brutal and bloody enough to be a serious standout on that front, and the emotional context and connection feels a bit undercooked. It runs a relatively short runtime, and I wonder if another 10 or 15 minutes to load up on those two things could have helped.  Some likeable performances aren't quite enough to save this one, so it's a distinctly middling 5.5/10 for this one.